I take a certain freedom in the realization that what ever opinions I have are at best partially true. Yes there are honor killings in Islam and in some quarters anti Americanism. The battles of secularism and extremism are not only being fought by the U.S. Islam itself is evolving - in some societies it will take time. Becoming polarized around our religions will probably be an obstacle. Let’s have level heads and take a pragmatic approach.
[quote]Sifu wrote:
Vegita wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Vegita wrote:
makkun wrote:
Great, another pissing contest. The funny bit of Vegita’s post was worth reading though. 
It’s nice to finally see some opposition to the long prevalent undifferentiating anti-muslim tone which has pervaded this forum for some time now.
Makkun
Thanks Dude,
I try to give a little humor and sarcasm with my points, But as you can see, the neo-con doesn’t have a senese of humor and accused me of being irrational. In response I yelled at him, many times creatures of this nature can only be reached in this manner. You have to talk to them like Hannity or O’Reilly do, this way they understand you are the Alpha Male and they should listen to what you say and do what you say. These Neo-Con types aren’t quite ready to do the critical thinking and self analisys that is required of most responsible human beings. And somehow the adults have let them gain control of the most powerful government in the world for 8 years. Unfortunately Another group of adolecents will be taking over soon, I dont think they will be as irresponsible on the foreign front, but they will likley completely socialize what remains of our country at home.
Oh Well,
V
Lol. You sure showed me.
If only you paleo-cons had succeeded in getting Ron Paul nominated, or Pat Buchanan a decade ago, there’d be no filthy neo-con Jews hijacking the Constitution today and creating a neo-con empire that our childrens’ children will be paying for. 9/11 would have never happened because such a government would have never allowed, nay, never caused it to happen.
See now you’re getting it. It wasn’t really that hard was it? Also if you think the constitution hasn’t been hijacked you are delusional. When the congress of the US tells the president that he cannot do something because it is illegal, and he respondes by telling then that he doesn’t care because he is above the law, well you are no longer living in a constitutional republic, you are living in a dictatorship. We may elect a new dictator every 4-8 years, but if they are above the law, they are not a president as outlined by our constitution.
So you can spout all the talking points and cute little saying you want, but you really can’t stand your ground with me on a factual debate so you might as well concede defeat right now. Either that or we can keep going and you (gasp) might actually learn something about how the mechanics of our government are supposed to work. I would advise the use of a seatbelt at this point in our flight, things may get bumpy from here on out.
V
Actually if you listen to what constitutional lawyers have to say a lot of the supposed constitutional violations that President Bush has committed are not.
The constitution actually does have some vagueries and gray areas because the founding fathers realized that the President needs to have some flexibility in order to get the country through unforeseen crisis. [/quote]
Ok buddy, I think you are on to something there. I don’t need to know what a constitutional lawyer thinks to know that when the president says he has the right to spy on US citizens, that is illegal and he should be taken to jail for it. Lawyers can go to hell, they lie cheat and steal, and if I remember correctly, Obama was a constitutional lawyer. The constitution, was not written with grey areas, it was not written so big government could control every aspect of my life, which is exactly what they are doing now and want to do even more of. The constitution is in place to prevent an overreaching and opressive government from having too much power, this is the main premise of it so why would they leave grey areas where the president could spy on the people, or even worse, call one a terrorist and hold him forever without a trial, a phone call, or even charging him with a crime.
P.S. I don’t want to censor or silence anyone, but if someone is simply copying the MSM with a propogandist hit peice, they are going to hear from me exactly what I think of thier views. Which is that they are the equivalant to a lemming running off a cliff. I don’t hate any of the lemmings, I actually like or love most of them I have met, but it doesn’t change the fact that they get spoonfed and told what to do and how to act, and when given a command by thier masters, they generally follow right along and do it.
V
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
Makavali wrote:
While this sort of thing is reprehensible and beyond vile, I don’t think pithy comments about how “another Muslim” killed a woman help things much. The problem is still the extremists.
It’s very easy ignore the segment of the Qur’an that states that it is “protected by Allah” from being changed or whatever it says. All it requires is a bit of rational thinking - something most intelligent people are capable of.
The issue we’re having is “what is mainstream?” vs. “what is extremist.” I’ll grant that most Muslims themselves won’t take up the violent portions of Islamic doctrine. But I find no evidence that they mentally disagree with them. Why would anyone remain in a religion where they disagree with a bunch of core doctrines?
I am a Christian b/c I believe that Christianity has a handle on Truth. You are a Hindu for probably the same reason. We’re not sitting here saying to ourselves, “I disagree with x,y, and z core doctrines of my respective faith, but I’m still a Christian/Hindu.” We’re especially not saying, “X,Y, and Z doctrines of my faith command me to be a violent asshole towards non-believers/women, but I still choose to be a member of that faith.” What would be the point? I think that Muslims give mental assent to jihad and shari’ah whether or not they enact it themselves, or else they’re completely ignorant of what Islam actually teaches.
To ignore the violent and backward parts of the Qur’an would be to ignore most of the latest/most authoritative parts of it. Sooner or later, you have to say to yourself, “It’s time I leave this faith,” if you don’t mentally agree with it. That is, of course, if you’re willing to risk the penalty for apostasy, which is death.
[/quote]
Ok I’m now at a loss for words. You want us to kill muslims or you don’t want us to kill muslims? You want they should convert to christianity? You want they should become Buddhist Monks? If you don’t want to kill them and don’t want to convert them then what do you want to do with them? Ship them to mars? I kinda want to go to mars, so I don’t think we should send them there. Maybe Uranus? I know i’ll never go there. Especially since your boyfriend goes there all the time.
So you claim your a peaceful loving christian. Your religion doesn’t teach hate, you are supposed to love everyone, yes even the guy who bashed his daughters head in with a rock. If you don’t understand those basic principles, and act on them everyday, then you are a christian in name only.
V
[quote]lixy wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
In the case of Islam, those who DO NOT commit violence in it’s name are disobeying the basic tenets of their religion. It is only very recent offshoots that are wholly unfaithful to their tradition that deny this.
Yes.
The billion+ of Muslims are just an offshoot. Ben Laden and co, the guys with infanticides on their hands and the rest are the one obeying “the basic tenets of” Islam.
It’s so clear now.
Thank you.[/quote]
Outstanding!!! Glad to see it finally sank in.
This is just like people calling themselves Americans after abandoning the principles that define what that is. The roots of historical Islam are violent and jihadist. The people who practice that are Muslims. The ones who don’t are apostates, no matter how many of them there are. The “extremists” are correct.
People seem to have this habit of simply redefining religion into their own image as they go. Obama says he’s a Christian. Except for the fact that he says the word Jesus what he believes bares little resemblance to historical Christianity or the plain teachings of the Bible.
Face it. The jihadist killers are practicing what the Quran, Muhammad and the early founders taught. Furthermore, even many of the apostates are hard pressed to condemn the jihadists.
We are up to our eyeballs in Arabs in Detroit. I wish I would have recorded it, but a while back some guy who was writing a book about Islam in America came here and they interviewed him on the local news. He said he went into it with no real opinions, just interest in what made America attractive to them.
He said he was shocked at how difficult it was to find any who said they were committed Muslims living here right now who would plainly denounce the 911 attacks. There were some, but the vast majority were either silent on the question or very equivocal in their answers. Many simply named whatever leader they claimed and told the guy to ask him.
He also said, interestingly, he had no problem finding large numbers of Arabs who were happy we invaded Iraq and took out Hussein, but they weren’t usually self described committed Muslims.
I do not trust Muslims because the evidence staring me in the face precludes that option. I couldn’t care less who thinks that makes me a hateful bigot. I don’t check my brain at the door of this neo American tolerance. That doesn’t mean I wear body armor in their presence, but I don’t like them bringing their world here.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
lixy wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
In the case of Islam, those who DO NOT commit violence in it’s name are disobeying the basic tenets of their religion. It is only very recent offshoots that are wholly unfaithful to their tradition that deny this.
Yes.
The billion+ of Muslims are just an offshoot. Ben Laden and co, the guys with infanticides on their hands and the rest are the one obeying “the basic tenets of” Islam.
It’s so clear now.
Thank you.
Outstanding!!! Glad to see it finally sank in.
This is just like people calling themselves Americans after abandoning the principles that define what that is. The roots of historical Islam are violent and jihadist. The people who practice that are Muslims. The ones who don’t are apostates, no matter how many of them there are. The “extremists” are correct.
People seem to have this habit of simply redefining religion into their own image as they go. Obama says he’s a Christian. Except for the fact that he says the word Jesus what he believes bares little resemblance to historical Christianity or the plain teachings of the Bible.
Face it. The jihadist killers are practicing what the Quran, Muhammad and the early founders taught. Furthermore, even many of even the apostates are hard pressed to condemn the jihadists.
We are up to our eyeballs in Arabs in Detroit. I wish I would have recorded it, but a while back some guy who was writing a book about Islam in America came here and they interviewed him on the local news. He said he went into it with no real opinions, just interest in what made America attractive to them.
He said he was shocked at how difficult it was to find any who said they were committed Muslims living here right now who would plainly denounce the 911 attacks. There were some, but the vast majority were either silent on the question or very equivocal in their answers. Many simply named whatever leader they claimed and told the guy to ask him.
He also said, interestingly, he had no problem finding large numbers of Arabs who were happy we invaded Iraq and took out Hussein, but they weren’t usually self described committed Muslims.
I do not trust Muslims because the evidence staring me in the face precludes that option. I couldn’t care less who thinks that makes me a hateful bigot. I don’t check my brain at the door of this neo American tolerance. That doesn’t mean I wear body armor in their presence, but I don’t like them bringing their world here.[/quote]
Then lets close the borders, Bring the troops home from the 173 bases around the globe and assign them to protect our borders from illegal immigrants. Also we can then put a moratorium on LEGAL immigration, until we can assimilate the hundreds of millions of immigrants who are here now ruining our way of life. This will most likley take a generation.
I agree with you that thier way of life can be messed up and I would not want myself or my family to live in conditions like that. I would get torn apart to save my daughters life, so obviously the anti-thesis to this is beyond comprehension. However, the road we are taking is towards one world government where populations (as long as you have the Nitional and soon world ID) can move freely about the globe. That means more muslims who are sick of living in the desert, moving to north america, and bringing thier culture with them.
V
[quote]Vegita wrote:
<<< Also we can then put a moratorium on LEGAL immigration, >>>
V[/quote]
I’ve been saying this very thing for years and years. Halt ALL immigration until such a time that we have a handle on who’s here, who can stay and who can’t. Then control our sovereign borders like they were in the early part of the 20th century.
VERRRRY expensive on all levels, but it’s exactly this type of thing that a government is supposed to be for. Not welfare, education, retirement, health care, financial bailouts and on and on.
We would have the money to fund any and all military operations and to secure our borders if we would quit financing failure in the form of all these social programs.
That would take at least a generation, at least, to adjust to, but it would not only get this country back on it’s capitalistic tracks, but would also give us control over this quiet foreign invasion we’ve been suffering.
It will not happen, I know that.
Also, let me be clear. I do not care where somebody comes from or what color they are if they come here legally, learn my language and become an American. Not just a legal citizen, but an American at heart. Anybody from anywhere can be an American and my hand is out in warm welcome to any who come here to join us.
I do not like it however, when they bring their country with them. If I wanted to live there I’d move there. That doesn’t mean there isn’t a place for ethnic tradition within those communities, but when we have entire sections of major cities where nobody speaks English and you can’t even tell you’re in the United States any more we are losing our national identity.
The idea of the melting pot was just that. All people can be melted into the American pot, but that’s not what we have any more. We have 1000 pots and it is killing this country.
You don’t really know what I want because of your constant stream of verbal diarhea.
I’m in favor of banning Islamic immigration to the West. I don’t think we need to bring over a bunch of people that will remain antagonistic to us, as we’ve done in Dearborn, MI, Irvine, CA, Seattle, WA and many other places where Islamic whining is common and sympathy for jihad runs high. Sorry. I believe Islam and the United States’ form of Constitutional democracy are fundamentally at odds.
[quote]red bull wrote:
Lol! It just gets better and better…[/quote]
Still looking pretty in pink, I see. It’s funny how you only turn up to comment on these Islam threads. Which da’wa organization do you work for?
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
You want us to kill muslims or you don’t want us to kill muslims? You want they should convert to christianity?
You don’t really know what I want because of your constant stream of verbal diarhea.
I’m in favor of banning Islamic immigration to the West. I don’t think we need to bring over a bunch of people that will remain antagonistic to us, as we’ve done in Dearborn, MI, Irvine, CA, Seattle, WA and many other places where Islamic whining is common and sympathy for jihad runs high. Sorry.
I believe Islam and the United States’ form of Constitutional democracy are fundamentally at odds. [/quote]
Then why not go after the people who enable them? Those currently in our government, and both of the presidential candidates for the 2 major parties.
Neither will bring troops home from 173 bases around the globe and put them on our border, Neither will halt illegal immigration, neither will moratorium Legal immigration. You already know who would have, but it’s too late for him.
Now we got to work at our local levels, getting the infrustructure in place so that the next time around we don’t get pushed around by the powers that be. Also it would help to send a message to the 2 party system by voting for any of the third party guys, whoever it is doesn’t really matter, pick the one you like the best.
V
[quote]Vegita wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
You want us to kill muslims or you don’t want us to kill muslims? You want they should convert to christianity?
You don’t really know what I want because of your constant stream of verbal diarhea.
I’m in favor of banning Islamic immigration to the West. I don’t think we need to bring over a bunch of people that will remain antagonistic to us, as we’ve done in Dearborn, MI, Irvine, CA, Seattle, WA and many other places where Islamic whining is common and sympathy for jihad runs high. Sorry.
I believe Islam and the United States’ form of Constitutional democracy are fundamentally at odds.
Then why not go after the people who enable them? Those currently in our government, and both of the presidential candidates for the 2 major parties.
Neither will bring troops home from 173 bases around the globe and put them on our border, Neither will halt illegal immigration, neither will moratorium Legal immigration. You already know who would have, but it’s too late for him.
Now we got to work at our local levels, getting the infrustructure in place so that the next time around we don’t get pushed around by the powers that be. Also it would help to send a message to the 2 party system by voting for any of the third party guys, whoever it is doesn’t really matter, pick the one you like the best.
V[/quote]
Well, that was the actual appeal of Ron Paul’s message, was it not? The problem is, he likes to play fast and loose with the historical data. We built a navy to project power against…wait for it…wait for it…the Muslim Barbary powers as early as 1789 who were kidnapping Europeans and Americans and selling them into slavery using the idea of jihad as their justification.
There is at least some truth to the idea that we need to “fight them over there.” Fighting them over there and then letting them move in next door is a zero sum game. Actually, it’s a negative sum game.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
You want us to kill muslims or you don’t want us to kill muslims? You want they should convert to christianity?
You don’t really know what I want because of your constant stream of verbal diarhea.
I’m in favor of banning Islamic immigration to the West. I don’t think we need to bring over a bunch of people that will remain antagonistic to us, as we’ve done in Dearborn, MI, Irvine, CA, Seattle, WA and many other places where Islamic whining is common and sympathy for jihad runs high. Sorry. I believe Islam and the United States’ form of Constitutional democracy are fundamentally at odds. [/quote]
I have to agree.
Islam has no separation of church and state at all. In their vision the church IS the state. The Christian vision is a state voluntarily informed by the church, but the church does not govern and conversion by force or death to infidels is not entertained in any way.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Outstanding!!! Glad to see it finally sank in. [/quote]
That was sarcasm.
Huh? Isn’t an “American” a person living in a particular place or born to parents holding an American citizenship?
I beg to differ. Islam, as the Quran refers to it, isn’t about violence. It’s about not getting tangled up in the earthly so much that one forgets to thank the Creator.
Heck, not even Al-Zawahiri would tell you that it’s about violence. They rationalize violence in a twisted self-defense argument. Listen or read up some of the crap coming from Al-Qaeda once in a while. You might end up learning something.[/quote]
Dunno. But by my interpretation, they’re not.
And there is no doubt in my mind that I studied the Islamic Book much (MUCH!) deeper than you.
That assertion is at directly at odds with the message of moderation in the Quran.
An extremist, in the sense you have in mind cannot possibly be correct.
Hence, Islamism.
76% of Americans say they are Christian and you pick Obama of all people?
Really?
Nope.
I’m sure you think you’re making sense, but you’re really not.
[quote]We are up to our eyeballs in Arabs in Detroit. I wish I would have recorded it, but a while back some guy who was writing a book about Islam in America came here and they interviewed him on the local news. He said he went into it with no real opinions, just interest in what made America attractive to them.
He said he was shocked at how difficult it was to find any who said they were committed Muslims living here right now who would plainly denounce the 911 attacks. There were some, but the vast majority were either silent on the question or very equivocal in their answers. Many simply named whatever leader they claimed and told the guy to ask him. [/quote]
Where’s his work published. I’d like to see both the figures and his methods.
Besides, you do realize that Arabs represent a minority of Muslims, don’t you?
Large numbers? I suggest you start looking at proportions instead.
I don’t like foreigners bringing their world to my country either. But I’m pretty certain it’s the way it’s always been. It’s just more pronounced now that we have cheap transportation and a global banking system.
I’ve read quite a few volumes by the American Forefathers and I can tell you that what you’re advocating is something they would have fought against. But hey, it’s just my interpretation. Others might believe America’s about slaying indigenous people, wasteful living and short-sightedness. Me, I truly believe that, early on, it stood for liberty.
Lixy is correct, The main motives for creating what we call The United States of America, was liberty and freedom for ALL people. Unless you break a law, your beliefs are your own. You are free to think that stabbing children in the eyes with knives is a good thing. Under the tenants of liberty and freedom, you should not be persecuted or harrased, or jailed or murdered, unless you act on those thoughts. This is not minority report.
Law enforcement was meant to be carried out at the local level by Police and sheriffs. The sheriff was supposed to be the highest ranking law enforcement official and he was elected by the people.
He was also in charge of the county Militia, should a centralized government grow too powerful and make laws that go against the constitution. That is his job. The military is not authorised to administer law enforcement duties. Yet they were stationed in New Orleans after Katrina. When people tried to cross the bridge out of New Orleans the only way out, they were turned back at gunpoint by the military.
So what role were they fulfilling?
Many of you will only realise after its far too late, the more power you give the federal government, the more they will use it to force you to do what they want, they will own you. That doesn’t sound like for the people by the people to me.
V
[quote]daudowen wrote:
I take a certain freedom in the realization that what ever opinions I have are at best partially true. Yes there are honor killings in Islam and in some quarters anti Americanism. The battles of secularism and extremism are not only being fought by the U.S. Islam itself is evolving - in some societies it will take time. Becoming polarized around our religions will probably be an obstacle. Let’s have level heads and take a pragmatic approach.[/quote]
Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and they usually stink.
There are reasons why people in any religion commit honor killings. The number one reason is taking religion far too seriously. When a religion allows any violence as part of it’s practices it opens the way to bloodshed.
The problem with Islam is this, it encourages people to take their religion super extremely seriously to the point that they are in competition with one another to show who is more devout. If the ultimate example of what a perfect practitioner of the religion was totally noviolent like a Budha or Dalai Lama or Jesus then there would be very few problems.
But when the ultimate example is a warlord who spent most of his life fighting, killing, enslaving and went to his deathbed spewing hatred the religion is irreperably flawed.
How can you reform or evolve a religion that teaches mohammad was gods ultimate messenger, the seal of the prophets? Sealed means over and done with, finished, no more, the final evolution. Mohammads final evolutionary step was away from the nonviolence of Jesus towards wanton bloodshed. That’s it take it or leave it.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
You want us to kill muslims or you don’t want us to kill muslims? You want they should convert to christianity?
You don’t really know what I want because of your constant stream of verbal diarhea.
I’m in favor of banning Islamic immigration to the West. I don’t think we need to bring over a bunch of people that will remain antagonistic to us, as we’ve done in Dearborn, MI, Irvine, CA, Seattle, WA and many other places where Islamic whining is common and sympathy for jihad runs high. Sorry. I believe Islam and the United States’ form of Constitutional democracy are fundamentally at odds.
I have to agree.
Islam has no separation of church and state at all. In their vision the church IS the state. The Christian vision is a state voluntarily informed by the church, but the church does not govern and conversion by force or death to infidels is not entertained in any way.[/quote]
Yeah, it isn’t as though there has ever been a Holy Roman Empire or anything like… oh.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Outstanding!!! Glad to see it finally sank in.
That was sarcasm.
[/quote]
I knew that, but I’m not getting into all this with you again.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
red bull wrote:
Lol! It just gets better and better…
Still looking pretty in pink, I see. It’s funny how you only turn up to comment on these Islam threads. Which da’wa organization do you work for?[/quote]
Oh God here we go again, the Lion of Judah roars…
My comment was directed towards another post - since deleted by the mods - which contained the words ‘Hitler’, ‘semites’ and ‘right’. Generally speaking, I call bad shit when I see it.
I see you’re still getting a hard-on over my shorts. Here’s a piece of advice - pay more attention to the arm bars and less on what the fighters are wearing, and you might learn something from those MMA events you like to attend…
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I’m in favor of banning Islamic immigration to the West.[/quote]
I’m in favor of banning immigration of people who have no intention of integrating into the society they choose to live with. Last I checked, that’s not just Muslims.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
I’m in favor of banning Islamic immigration to the West.
I’m in favor of banning immigration of people who have no intention of integrating into the society they choose to live with. Last I checked, that’s not just Muslims.[/quote]
I would have to agree with this too.
If I were to move abroad it would not so much as occur to me that that nation, whoever it may be, was under obligation to accommodate me in any way. I am in their country and it is my responsibility to conduct myself in a manner satisfactory to my hosts, not the other way around.
No it is not just Muslims by any stretch and we have done this to ourselves.
[quote]red bull wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
red bull wrote:
Lol! It just gets better and better…
Still looking pretty in pink, I see. It’s funny how you only turn up to comment on these Islam threads. Which da’wa organization do you work for?
Oh God here we go again, the Lion of Judah roars…
My comment was directed towards another post - since deleted by the mods - which contained the words ‘Hitler’, ‘semites’ and ‘right’. Generally speaking, I call bad shit when I see it.
[/quote]
Which post got deleted - the one with Hitler meeting with Yasser Arafat’s uncle? Hitler did get his special clothing/insignia idea from the Muslims.
There are a whole set of regulations dhimmis (Jews and Christians living under shari’ah) had to abide by in Moslem lands, including special clothing and insignia, quartering of Moslems upon demand, special taxes (jizya), etc. Any violation resulted in lashings or usually death.
You should read Andrew Bostom some time - he compiled an entire book of original Muslim sources on the treatment of non-believers. Of course, you probably already know this. Muslims are good at playing dumb.
Actually, I was noticing a few of your more obviously flamboyant tendencies. I thought those were punishable by death in your religion, yet they don’t seem to have caught up to you yet. Well, good for you for pushing the envelope. Your type needs more freedom in the Muslim world.